Skip to main content

About your Search

20121108
20121116
STATION
CNN 3
CNNW 3
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
CSPAN 2
LANGUAGE
English 18
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)
in 2012 when you can keep running against john kerry in 2004. it's all over fox this morning. they know how it ends. it's like old biff getting into the "back to the future" car. it's something else, man. >> stephanie: yes, they're literally running the old swift vote as against john kerry because he's rumored to be secretary of defense. >> eric: yes mccain wants watergate hearings and the majority looking for robo calls and impeachment. >> stephanie: they are holding a press conference because of their old pull john mccain and said hearings are not required because he went to the briefing to find out what the truth is rather than grandstanding like the increasingly bitter elf john mccain. >> they had sources sources in the testimony that petraeus game gave in september 14th. he said don't want the center line or do you want the truth. to some it looks like he was going along this was in interest of the national security or was he being blackmailed to toe the line. >> stephanie: some said this to petraeus at some point. >> yes, and then blackmail. >> stephanie: yes, clearly. wow. do we
unqualifiable or unqualified for the position so they can appoint john kerry which opens up the senate seat to mass, let's deal with that later. the question for the governor. you affirm the intelligence assessments read on the sunday shows were wrong. and i think it's fair and obvious that the intelligence leading up to the attack was wrong and missed the attack. so can you talk about what type of massive or maybe not so massive intelligence failure occurred on the president's watch and what can be done to actually fix that? >> look, what the president has said and what is going on is an investigation. ambassador tom pickering, probably the most senior member conducting that investigation, you to read all of the e-mails, all of the cables, all of the meetings, and you make an assessment of who bears some responsibility in this issue. is it diplomatic security? is intelligence? i think there's another issue here which really concerns me and that at one point the disclosure of some of our libyan assets was made publicly by one of the house committees. i think we have to be very careful about
the possibility that senator john kerry could be nominated to replace, to succeed leon panetta as secretary of defense. >> i think that's true. they certainly weren't falling over themselves saying we would vote to approve john kerry if nominated, but they didn't have any kind of aversion to him either. he's one of the club here in terms of the senate club. but back to this whole question of susan rice, i think as i mentioned before, i was the one who provoked senator graham and senator mccain into talking about susan rice because the question that i asked was something i've been hearing from democrats, which is this, why are you so opposed to susan rice after she made some potentially incorrect or what now seemed to be incorrect statements publicly when they supported condoleezza rice back in the bush years for secretary of state after she clearly made incorrect public statements about weapons of mass destruction in iraq. and that's what provide voloked whole discussion. it comes to a question, it seems to me, certainly they're angry and these republican senators are calling for a select c
policy. john kerry, same thing, but no place in politics, no elective office that mitt romney holds. i don't see where he easily fits back into the party. >> he can become a cable tv host. >> who knows. >> there's one of those networks out there. what do you think? you think he has -- a lot of the republican party today, he's gone, over, history. it sounded like a valedictory. he didn't talk about our cause will live, we're going to continue to fight in the future. it was sort of like he was going to recede, he had done it twice, he lost. there are a lot of people who regarded him as the transitional figurine when he was the nominee of the party. so i think he'll go back to business, maybe to bain capital, who knows. i don't see politics in his future. >> what about paul ryan? will he just pick up where he left off? or do you see him broaden out? claim the mantle of the party standard bear. >> he has time. listen, he has something that is very hard for a house member to get and that is nationwide recognition. he is also a bonafide brainiac when it comes to budget things. you may not ag
the independent vote ended up losing the presidential contest. john kerry in 2004 won it by 1 percentage point, and then mitt romney in this election just last week won it by 5 percentage points but lost. it raises the question, you know, it's always good to win independent voters, but it might not determinative of an election. >> what is the lesson learned here. it's great to consider those that are independent, they're not strongly tied to one aparty or the other. if they're not the difference maker, not that they should be ignored, but how much do you play to them? >> the difference maker seems to be in all the elections the party identification. having democrats or republicans more than the opposition, that's a very good indication who is going to end up winning an election. the other thing is how do you define "independents"? are they right down the middle and swing from one election to another? or as the theory goes, when the political wins are against their party, they're republican, they're not happy with the republican party. they say i'm going to call myself an independent because i'
he came out so strongly so that when he doesn't appoint her and goes with someone like john kerry or even tom donelan, his defense is already on record. and he doesn't have to relitigate that again in the press. >> i'll tell you what i saw yesterday, issue aside, i saw a president with a heightened level of testosterone, gravitas, and maybe a precursor of what he's going to look like the next four years. i saw a definite different kick to his step. obviously, he's been going toe to toe, but there was an authority, there was a -- i'm going to keep using the word "testosterone." a lot of that was missing in the first term, and i found that very interesting, his first kind of public volley eight days later as a harbinger of things to come. >> he spoke quickly in that press conference. did you notice? it was the fastest i've ever heard him speak. you know, we got accustomed over the past four years to a very slow, methodic kind of elongated speech pattern. and he came out, he was rapid, he was quick. >> you got a problem? come to me. i found that very interesting. >> richard, what are
earlier but didn't have a chance. john kerry is my friend. i worked so hard for him when he was running for president. i did everything i could to help him. and he came very, very close. there's been no better legislator that i served with. he's been way out front on issues dealing with climate change, infrastructure, bank development and many other things. so i don't know any conversation that the president or nip in the white house has had with -- anyone in the white house has had with him and any conversation i have with john kerry he does not bring up about him being secretary of anything. but i'll do anything to help him if he's chosen. we feel very comfortable if in fact something does happen, we feel comfortable in massachusetts. i think that i've already told you how i feel about scott brown. >> what do you think his priorities should be coming out of today's conference? >> the president's priorities are as he outlined in his campaign. protect the middle class and small business. we're one vote away from that being accomplished. all we have to do is have the house of representat
wanted to tell you earlier but did not have the chance. john kerry is my friend. i worked so hard for him when he was running for president. i did everything i could to help them. he came very close. there has been no better legislator that i served with. he has been way out front on issues dealing with climate change, infrastructure, bank development, many other things. i do not know any conversation with the president or anyone in the white house has had with him. any conversation i have had with john kerry, he does not bring up the secretary of anything. i'll do everything i can to help him if he is chosen. we feel very comfortable if in fact something does happen, we feel comfortable that massachusetts will -- i have already told you how i feel about scott brown. >> what do you think are his priorities -- his party should be? parties -- toent partie protect the middle-class and small business. we are one vote away from that being accomplished. all we have to do is have the house of representatives bring up our bill. we have brought up their bill -- it was roundly defeated. they should
should bring john kerry in to. >> caller: to talk about iraq? i'm sure no one did. they didn't even ask al gore, who won the popular vote. >> stephanie: that's what drives me insane. that's the premise. >> caller: you have to watch out every time david gregory says just one more thing. the next question is going to be a barrel full of stupid. my favorite was the brown-warren debate and i emblazoned this question on my mind so i would never forget. we have only five minutes left, let's deal with some other issues. what about afghanistan. after spending 20 minutes on something that may have been or not have been on her job application. oh, oh by the way, the war we're having, what do you think. >> president johnson, do you see a role for senator goldwater in your administration. >> caller: whoever asked that. whoever asked that would get halfway through the question and lyndon would have his peculiar pecker on thatthat in his pocket. >> stephanie: now we have to go. >> caller: now make sure that your little petraeus is behaving behaving. >> we'll talk with charlie about that next week. >
capitol in this term and while john kerry is waiting in the wings. saying i can do it and reporting for duty. it promiseless to give you a boost. watch a warning this morning. five-hour energy could kill you. that's the question. >> brian: it is a question. we have not answered that question. >> gretchen: is she's new's reporter or gushing fan. >> thank you, mr. president and congratulations by the way. one quick follow up. >> it is when i was running foritate senate. >> christie and i have gone away. i never seen you lose. can sneet ♪ c ♪ ♪ it's swanson flavor boost. concentrated broth to add delicious flavor to your skillet dish in just one stir. mmm! [ female announcer ] cook, meet compliments. get recipes at flavorboost.com. >> thank you, mr. president and congratulations by the way. one quick follow up. >> she was there when i ran for state senate. >> i was i never seen you lose . i wasn't looking that one time. >> steve: maybe you could call her the president's biggest fan. a chicago newspaper reporter in the east room congratulating the commander-in-chief on the win in
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)